September 9, 2016

Headline at The Washington Post for a piece by by Anne Gearan, Jenna Johnson and John Wagner.

With Election Day less than two months away, Democrats are increasingly worried that Hillary Clinton has not built a formidable lead against Donald Trump despite his historic weaknesses as a national party candidate.

Even the Democratic nominee’s advisers acknowledge that she must make changes, and quickly....

Panic. What to do?

One new goal for Clinton now, aides said, is to spend more time trying to connect directly with voters by sharing a more personal side of herself....

That's a "new goal"? That's exactly what she purported to be doing when she announced her candidacy in spring 2015. I don't think there is a more personal side.

Some changes in Clinton’s operation are already in evidence on the campaign trail. Among them: More interaction with the press; a series of policy speeches that Clinton’s communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, said are “more about her than about him;” and a shift back toward positive messages in television advertising and efforts to present positive elements of her biography elsewhere.

It must be utterly confounding that attacking Trump doesn't work.

Clinton also played to the cameras and showed a flash of irreverent humor Friday... “Every day that goes by, this just becomes more of a reality television show,” she said. “It’s not a serious presidential campaign. And it is beyond one’s imagination to have a candidate for president praising a Russian autocrat like Vladimir Putin and throwing his lot in with him,” Clinton said.

85 comments:

Clinton also played to the cameras and showed a flash of irreverent humor Friday... “Every day that goes by, this just becomes more of a reality television show,” she said. “It’s not a serious presidential campaign. And it is beyond one’s imagination to have a candidate for president praising a Russian autocrat like Vladimir Putin and throwing his lot in with him,” Clinton said.

No, Hillary, what's "beyond one's imagination" is the US President favoring Iran's dictatorial Mullahs over the Green Revolution, but that's exactly what Obama did in 2009, while you were his Sec of State.

"Scum favoring dictators"? That's a glass house where you should not be throwing any stones, Ms "Reset button"

Why wasn't Trump ahead of Hillary much much sooner? I follow many of the anti-Trump comments here. I have yet to hear any of the most vocal praise Hillary or even so much as argue her points. That's just the way it is, but why?

Instead of the hopeful language, One new goal for Clinton now, aides said, is to spend more time trying to connect directly with voters by sharing a more personal side of herself, you'd get something like, "Shake up in the Trump campaign! Chaos!" and it wouldn't be "aides" that are saying this, it would be, "Unnamed sources close to the Trump campaign".

Basically, the media is covering for panic inside the Clinton campaign. A month ago, she had this all sewn up. She was 15 points ahead and never looking back.

Now, she just might lose.

I'm skeptical. I actually think the media and pollsters are just trying to sell us a race. It's no fun if she wins walking away. It's gotta be close.

Blogger mockturtle said...Throwing perfume on a stinking carcass will only mask the stench for so long.

This isn't a real article anyway. What positive things is Hillary going to say?

All they have is negatives on Trump. That's how she can win. Bringing down Trump. That's it. She has no positive message. She couldn't even get through the CoC thing without disobeying the rules and attacking Trump.

"Imagine if it was someone other than Trump on the R side."It wouldn't make any difference. The Dems would demonize him or her and the press would follow the lead of the Democrats, because the press is made up of Democrats.In 2008 the GOP the GOP ran a moderate against a virtually unknown junior senator from Illinois.McCain lost 46% to 53%.In 2012 the GOP ran a moderate, experienced governor against Obama, who was presiding over a recovery so weak most people thought we were still in a recession.Romney lost 47% to 51%.

On Friday she did not know [C] stood for confidential/classified and could not remember if anyone had ever given her instructions about these things.On Wednesday next she had full command of all security classifications and means of secure communications.And so it goes.

I am not a Hillary hater though I am completely opposed to her being President of the United States. And it is not just that I oppose her on almost everything politically. The presidency is a completely wrong fit for some one of Hillary's personality and skill sets. Her ambition while legendary serves only to serve others while being used by people on the political left for their own purposes. How was that? We often don't look at it from the opposite perspective Hillary would be chewed up and spit out if she weren't even close to this situation. It's the sycophants and left-wing rulers that want her and are propping her up to become the first woman president. That being said what a Donald Trump should do - and do this in the first debate - is say that he believes that Hillary is not a completely terrible human being. In fact, he should say he believes that Hillary's skill-set is not right for the presidency, but her skills in situations where she is being given direction can be very effective and should be put to great use for the American people. Say that she was horribly used and directed by Barack Obama. She is not a visionary leader. For example, Donald could say "I would use her as head of Homeland Security. She would have structured direction and would probably be excellent at it. That would be an excellent use of Hillary's natural skill sets". It's not a male/female thing. It's a personality, natural ability, temperament thing.

I'm old enough to remember The New Nixon. That's the New Hillary. And, I have posted before, Nixon won 1972 in a landslide, and by 1974 he was gone.BTW, if it's okay for women to vote their genitals, why is it so wrong for men to do so?

She could do an apology tour, to all those populations and peoples that have suffered from the recent administrations. She could have a bunch of her people ritually sacrificed, made to do the Cersei walk for instance, through West Virginia.That would be popular.

Trump has fired multiple aides from his campaign, including such high-rankers as Lewandowki & Manafort. When an aide became a liability or when a different direction was needed, Trump made the decision & replaced his staffers.

But Hillary? She ran a lackluster primary campaign that could barely put away an aging socialist from a small state who wasn't even a Democrat. Truth is, if it up to white Democrats, we'd be looking at a Sanders' candidacy now. It was the blacks who pulled HRC across the finish line. Now, she's spending oodles of dollars & Trump's basically tied, if not ahead, in a four way race.

Anybody hearing any rumors of staff shake-ups in the HRC campaign? Nope, me neither. The reason why is because her coterie is what has created the Hillary! brand, & she can't do it without them. She will sink or swim with the same crew until election day.

How unpopular is Trump? Trump is so darn unpopular that he set records in voter turnout. He’s so unpopular that he beat over a dozen of the elite GOP’s favorite candidates like a bunch of babies. They’re still whining. Trump is so unpopular he attracts tens of thousands at his rallies.

On the other hand, Hillary is so deeply popular that she doesn’t need to bother with no stupid overheated rallies but instead sensibly opts for a sedate but totally inspired, politely clapping two or three hundreds as a backdrop for her competence and steadiness at the helm of the ship of state.

Trump leads on real issues facing the voters that voters are deeply angry about to the point of a RESOLVE TO ELECT TRUMP.

Burned out Hillary hides out, gets her Meds stabilized so she can walk and talk, and then reads lies about Trump being a southern white bigot and Trump being a Commie fellow traveler with the old USSR. These are silly outdated smears carefully crafted by older operatives whose minds are still stuck in the 1980s. Maybe it's Bill? Deep down Bill wants her to lose.

"spend more time trying to connect directly with voters by sharing a more personal side of herself..."

Sure. She can hold a Blackberry hammering contest, or offer Happy Hour with Huma, or do fireside chats to recount Tales of Whitewater, or personally hand out free rape kits at her next rally, or read Hard Choices out loud in one stretch without coughing, or do a one-on-one with Oprah about the last time she and Bill had sex.

Oh, and it was such a good plan, too. Spend a ton of money on Trump attack ads, keep out of sight and coast to the election.

Maybe a good first step would be to jettison Jennifer Palmieri (for one thing, she's distractingly unattractive). But as for her personal story, what has she got? Her mother had a rough childhood (along with hundreds of thousands of other children during the Depression) and she loves being a grandmother. She's never been deprived or had to struggle. Any problems she's had she essentially brought on herself. There are probably a lot of women who could identify with her struggle with a philandering husband, but I'm guessing she doesn't want to talk about that.

The problem is, we've know Hillary for a long, long time. We sincerely doubt there's another side to her that we just haven't seen yet.

Human societies really can be come insect-like. Queen bees really do need their loyal worker bees (females) to back them up to the hilt. In these societies, the males become useless drones.

Now granted, I probably wouldn't mind doing nothing but mate with high ranking females all day long (although in this case it's every guy mating with just one - which sounds like it can get messy and disgusting). But I think that would get old after a while.

Eventually I'd want to be a part of a less socialistic economy. Innovation and reward, it seems, is just not for the bees.

"One new goal for Clinton now, aides said, is to spend more time trying to connect directly with voters by sharing a more personal side of herself...."

I saw her a number of times. She does not connect with people. A few partisans like her. That's it. She's a sick, tired and old woman who has run a racketeering organization. A great criminal but not a good liar. A very annoying voice and manner. Please go away. Leave us alone.

I don't think the press will continue to treat her this gently after the election, and that's win or lose. She'll go the way of Carter and LBJ. She doesn't have the charm and charisma of JFK, her husband or Obama. That's what the press feeds on. Slim rations with Hillary. It's ok to be incompetent or corrupt, but that cackle is unforgivable.

Today the panel on MSNBC's Morning Joe said Hillary is just too smart and knows too much. People cannot keep up with her and so do not understand how great she is. Dumb Trump on the other hand knows little but communicates on the same level as the undereducated incurious public. And the panel plus Chuck Todd claimed Trump lies so well and so often no one can correct his lies fast enough and so they go unchallenged.

Someone on the panel said Hillary' email problem was just quibbling about email etiquettte.

chickelit said...Why wasn't Trump ahead of Hillary much much sooner? I follow many of the anti-Trump comments here. I have yet to hear any of the most vocal praise Hillary or even so much as argue her points. That's just the way it is, but why?

But why? Is that a serious question? let's start with, what are they going to praise Monica Lewinsky's ex-boyfriend's wife, corrupt brain damaged alcoholic enabler of her sexual predator husband for? Her brilliant foreign policy successes as SECSTATE? Not a winning thing to bring up. How about the way she successfully navigated her healthcare plan through congress when she was first lady? Oops, another failure. Not to mention the secret meetings in violation of various sunshine laws...

And her points. How about her plans to continue bringing muslim immigrants into the U.S. in virtually unlimited numbers with no vetting? think the American people will get behind that? And unrestricted amnesty for illegal immigrants already here? think that's a winner? Single payer heath care to replace the failed Obamacare? Another winner?

I don't even know what concrete plans she has proposed, and I follow politics. Amorphous thoughts and feelings are all that come out of her.

Let's face it. If she were running against Evan McMillan's placeholder vp, Nathan Johnson, it would be close. She couldn't even shake Bernie Sanders, who continued winning states after being mathematically eliminated. She did step up her game after replacing people in the latter stages of the '08 primary, but she's now 8 years older and lacks Trump's campaign energy (although I both don't think she's sick and do think he's at risk of blowing a gasket between now and November 8).

Gram Parsons was in every aspect, and indeed has remained but moreso, in every last single honorable/respectable aspects tangible then and now, American Superior. Little Mick showed at Altamnt after my Flying Bburrito Brothers looked at he shit audience in the shit Stnes direction and just wanted to leave.

Leave the Stones and their fucked mayhem away, gone, discarded from even memory when possible, was the horribleness evident.

Potentially Like every last NFL player including kickers, who in ways mysterious rule empires of confidence.

Not in Denver last night, but like losing in Lambeau, much, much much much worse things could happen.

I suppose Hillary is looking into the abyss. If she doesn't win, everything that she has suffered through and endured shame for, for at least four decades, will have been for nothing.Donations to the CGI will dry up. No power in the Democrat party. No legacy. Nothing but a mouth full of ashes.

The more Hillary is visible and audible to the public the more her polls go down. When she stays out of sight her numbers improve.

The catch is she can't stay completely out of sight of even the friendly lapdog press will wonder "what's wrong" with miss H. She has to be out there and being out there is killing her last chance. It's delicious to watch and I'm having schadenfreude thrills watching her slo-mo train wreck happen. Weeee!

Where are the stories about why Trump has virtually no chance of winning. Given the economy, Trump should be within a point, or tied. Given the fact the Democrats have held office for two straight terms, he should be a point or two ahead. Given the fact that he's running against the most unpopular candidate in Democrat history, he should be 3-4 points ahead. Given the fact that he's running against an establishment candidate in an anti-establishment year, he should be 5-6 points ahead. The real story this election is why is the Republican candidate for President destined to lose?

If the Republicans had a candidate who made the "Tory" pivot, as Cameron had to do, we would win in a landslide. If the Republicans had a candidate who appealed to immigrant voters (who, by virtue of the fact that they work harder than native Americans - this is a fact, folks, look it up - are natural Republican voters), we would win in a Regan landslide. If we had a candidate who could objectively call Hillary out on her corruption, without getting bogged down in his own, we would win in a 50 state landslide.

No worries. Trump will lose the most winnable election in Republican history. We'll John Birch the Trumpers. And we'll come back strong in 2020. Hillary is lucky this election, she won't be lucky next.

First, I had to agree with Maureen Dowd about the FBI letting Clinton off on the email server. And now I have to agree with Ted Rall about the obvious corruption of Clinton Foundation donors getting access to the Secretary of State.

There is an obvious cognitive dissonance between the portrayal of each candidate and what people are actually seeing. Trump is supposed to be a bombastic virulent racist. However, Trump is in this negotiator mode that a natural groove for him. He's laying out plans, staking out his requirements while appearing to be flexible on the details.

Hillary is supposed to be a calm, intelligent, politically savvy operator. But the trickle of emails and other things from FOIA requests is just killing her. On top of that, we know many emails were erased and not recovered. People who are even slightly bothered by the emails they've seen are thinking that what was erased must be much worse.

Dem politicos and their functionaries have wandered so long in a wasteland of unethical behavior that they have no clue as to why a significant majority of citizens see the Hillbilly harridan as a greedy, over ambitious, immoral, monomaniacal monster. Astoundingly, they just do not get it. Why not? That's the real question the article should be asking because it certainly is the question that occurs to me first. How can they possibly not see what a pig this creature is?

I have never liked Trump. But: He's not a lawyer. He's not a politician. Therein lies his power. People know what they would be getting. Hence he's teflon. They also know what they would be getting in Clinton: The stink of a rotting corpse.

I think the plan was to raise huge piles of money, and spend it on advertising. Which her campaign seems to be doing. This would allow her to play to her strength, which is hob nobbing with the rich and famous, and ignoring dealing with real people, or even the press that much. After all, she claims to work hard for the children, the women, and supposedly the downtrodden. And spending that much money should have allowed her to define her opponent, more than they could define her, thanks to Dems being able to raise significantly more money than Republicans (used to be because they were the party of unionized labor, but now because they are the party of the super rich, and the party has figured out how to collect almost unlimited donations from people through splitting donations among local parties, which then remit it back to the national candidate and party).

I see several things that have interfered with this plan. First maybe is Donald Trump. Everyone talks about how a traditional Republican candidate would be far ahead of her. I am unconvinced. A traditional candidate would probably be playing her game, trying to win through advertising and GOTV. But, the Dems have sizable advantages in both these areas. Unless and until the campaign finance laws are tightened up, the Dems will continue to have a sizable advantage in the amount of campaign contributions that they can raise. As I noted above, they are the party of the very rich, the billionaires party, and esp during the Obama years, there has been a massive shift in wealth to this demographic. Everyone else is poorer, and they are much richer. And part of that is that they can buy govt favors, which the Dems are much more willng nag to sell. Trump cuts through all this, and has essentially eliminated the traditional advantage that the hundreds of millions in ad buys would have benefited the Dem candidate in previous campaigns. It is he, not her, and not her surrogates, sycophants, and lackeys (including the MSM) who is setting the agenda and the debate.

Then there is the problem that her supposed experience has essentially been negated by her corruption. Right now, she is faced with the dilemma that she had to essentially claim amnesia of the time when she was Sec of State in order to avoid the FBI recommending prosecution for her email crimes. How can she claim that as experience, if she can't remember it? And if she can remember it, then she was lying to the FBI. Moreover, most of what she did in that position turned to shit, either under her watch, or later. Most Americans realize that we live in a more dangerous world than when she took office.

Next - I really believe that her health issues are affecting her ability to campaign. She just doesn't have nearly the energy to run around the country making appearances. She could have gone to Mexico and met with their President, but gave a BS excuse instead. She could have gone to Louisiana with their flooding, and didn't. This is one place where almost any Republican candidate would likely be beating her pants off, not just Trump. My guess is that part of why she has built her campaign around fund raising and advertising, instead of making public appearances and talked to the press, is that it is much less stressful. And that probably helps keep whatever her ailment is, from flaring up.

Finally, from pretty much every source, she is really a dislikable person. Arrogant, entitled, bitter, vendictive, with a vile, explosive temper. People back her for what she can do for them, and not because they like her. Someone above noted that her husband and Obama have charm, but so do GW Bush and Trump. People like being around them (and, I think esp Bill Clinton, with his exceptional personal charisma). She can't charm anyone, except maybe her grandkids. Which is another part, probably, of why they tried to win by massively outspending using advertising. That is the only thing that can counteract and hide her personality deficits.

I am not sure that the Crooked Hillary campaign can turn things around. If they win, they will do it limping across the finish line. I think that the bigproblem is her health and energy. She needs to be the one setting the debate. The one who has to be followed. The one meeting with foreign leaders and available to the press for comments. I don't think that she could do it today, even if she wanted to, and her inclination is the opposite, to view everyone not in her immediate camp as an enemy. She is too much the control freak micromanager. And, there is always the question of whether she is the one runner nag her campaign, or whether her handlers run her (which is part of why the story about the earpiece probably hurt her). Either way, they seem incapable of reacting quickly to much of anything. Not sure what will happen if real panic sets in, if she gets behind, and esp if the Republicans Appear set to sweep both Houses of Congress, although nag with the Presidency. We shall see.

How can it be a surprise that Hillary is struggling? Look what they had to do to get rid of Bernie, who wasn't even trying to win. Did hey really think getting past Trump, who tries to win sometimes, would be easier?

If the Republicans had nominated a reasonable candidate, it would be 1984 again. If the Democrats had nominated a reasonable candidate, it would be 1964 again. If both parties had nominated reasonable candidates.... Nah, never happen.

Where are the stories about why Trump has virtually no chance of winning … The real story this election is why is the Republican candidate for President destined to lose … Trump will lose the most winnable election in Republican history.

This commentor has adopted a meme that the MSM has already tried, found to be worthless and dropped like a deplorable hot rock. Except for a few unimaginative lefty blogs the MSM moved away from this meme a couple of days ago after the new polls came rolling in.

Self-fulfilling prophesies don’t seem to work on Trump and this disturbing fact is turning the MSM into a basket case. In the past it has been a potent tactic. Hysteria, caused by the extreme frustration over Trump’s seeming immunity to the MSM’s usual pro-Democrat shenanigans, is rampant and has infected The Establishment like a Zika virus.

They’re currently searching for a new narrative that might work better against Trump and his utterly deplorable supporters. Hillary has given them a new phrase: “basket of deplorables.” The lefty blogs will run it up the old flagpole to see if it has more traction than the discarded Trump-is-doomed theme.

But the “basket of deplorables” phrase is the revival of a tactic that was tried and discarded months ago; which was to shame anyone who might be considering Trump as a serious candidate by labeling Trump supporters as racist. It didn’t work then and it will not work now but they’re desperate and desperate people do desperate things.

Shame isn't going to work for Crooked Hillary at this point. Too many people going to Trump rallies. Too many Trump lawn signs. Etc. But it might work the other way around. She's the criminal one, the grifter. She's the one no one wants to put up lawn signs for, or bumper stickers for their cars. And, the demographic most susceptible to shame, the upper middle class, is the one that has been leaning towards Crooked Hillary more than usual this time around, and it might just keep them from pulling the lever for her.

For the psychologist licensing exam, it is about 70%. It varies by school. The good schools are between 90-100% pass. Did Hillary go to a good law school? Maybe she was the victim of sexual harassment ... or something.

Blogger Nals said.If the Republicans had a candidate who made the "Tory" pivot, as Cameron had to do, we would win in a landslide.

And what would "we" win under that circumstance?

I'm not a huge Trump supporter (though I'm starting to think I will vote for him after all) but I do know that my interests and the interests of the Republican party do not always coincide. Just because the Republican party wins, it doesn't mean that I win.

I told a Democrat friend of mine that the Democrats ALWAYS call the Republican nominee a Nazi, and compare him to Hitler, and call him a racist sexist homophobe. And he looked at me with a stunned expression like it never occurred to him before.He was sincerely surprised to hear it, and he didn't try to deny it. I'm thinking that Democrat voters are in a trance of some kind and have no idea how they are continually manipulated.

Realtively few likely voters have spent the last 25 or so years on Neptune or otherwise off the grid. No introduction to Hillary is needed, we know her quite well. This is why she isn't far ahead of Trump.